MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ground support design for weak rock mass: quantifying time-dependent closure in squeezing ground

2019· article· en· W2981883123 on OpenAlexafffund
S. N. Warren, R. Pakalnis, M. J. Raffaldi, Donovan J. Benton, Louis Sandbak, Chase K. Barnard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsExcavationClosure (psychology)Rock mass classificationHazardous wasteGroundwaterFunction (biology)Mining engineeringGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mining in weak and highly fractured rock can result in hazardous mining conditions and poses challenges to designing appropriate ground support for the intended use of the excavation. Production levels and infrastructure often require different support strategies because of varying tolerance to time-dependent closure and squeezing ground conditions. This paper presents an empirically derived ground support design methodology that estimates squeeze rate as a function of W-RMR and ground support capacity. This information aids the engineer in designing ground support appropriate to rock mass conditions and intended excavation use, thereby increasing confidence in support design and improving safety in underground mines.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207